I've been on the lookout for a new lens recently and came across the Tokina 12-24mm that appears to fit everything I'm looking for. Being a noob, and seeing the price of the Tokina compared to the same one made by Nikon, I was astonished to find the prices so different. I read reviews on both and essentially anyone who bought the Tokina was very happy they did without having to spend nearly twice as much on the Nikon lens. According to Rockwell, he believes the same thing (but, I know how heated a Rockwell opinion can get).

So, with that said, I'm wondering if anyone owns this lens from Tokina? Or, any lens in general from them that could have been bought in Nikon's brand as well. Is there a big difference?

Also, mods, if this has been answered please lock. I ran a quick search and didn't find much. Apologies if it has been. Thanks all.

A lot of people recommend the 11-16/2.8 lens by Tokina, and the build and optical quality for that price is why people choose Tokina over the Nikon version. The 12-24 has two versions, as I see you own the D3100, so make sure buying the latest version with a red line on the tag. (PS why you dont seem to find much, is because this question is probably answered in the Third party lens part of this forum).

Hi Daden
You are having the same problem as me I am after a landscape lens and after much hunting I have decide on a Tokina but which one. I originally was leaning towards the 12-24 but now I am becoming more convinced after listening to owners that the 11-16 would be a better choice although its a dearer lens the f2.8 is a selling point. I have a Nikkor 18-200 so although not so hot at 18mm with a pronounced fall off it gets much better at 25mm. so for me the 11-16 Tokina would fit nicely at the wide angle end.
The only thing I may do is rent both lenses so I can compare which will suit my needs better.

I have and use the Tokina 11-16 F2.8 and it's a delightful lens in many ways. Not being much of a landscape shooter, I consider this my "party lens" in the sense that it's great for indoor spaces..gives a good sense of a space instead of the the cramped feel one might capture with less wide lenses.

Furthermore it's that much more light-sensitive and gives a slightly more shallow depth of field.

If I have any criticisms of this lens, it's how prone it is to flares in sunlight..pretty large hard-to-remove large crescents.

However, the same may be the case of the 12-24 - I do not know.

Regardless, if used carefully, it can produce very pleasing results.

Due to the good focal range readouts on the lens, you can go hyper focal, and thereby reduce the minimum focus distance for close-up shots.

Thanks for that Lalahsr its nice to hear from owners who have given a product a good thrashing over a period of time.
Regarding the flare issue have you found that removing the filter (if you use one) improves things? as I have read that some people believe the flare on these lenses increases with the use of a filter due to the large front lens and light bounce between the primary glass and the filter.
thanks in advance for your reply.